Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee preferred two appeals against orders passed by the NFAC pertaining to Assessment Years 2013-14 and 2014-15. The appeals dealt with additions on account of commission income and investment. The assessee did not appear before the Tribunal, and the case proceeded ex-parte.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeals for want of evidence without affording adequate opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, the Tribunal restored the appeals to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeals for want of evidence without providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE & SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE
O R D E R PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM: & 3132/Mum/2025 are two separate appeals by the assessee preferred against two separate orders dt. 04/03/2025 by NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter “the ld. CIT(A)”] pertaining to AY 2013-14 and 2014-15.
Since common grievance is involved in both the appeals, they were heard together and are disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity.
None appeared on behalf of the assessee in spite of notices. We decided to proceed ex-parte. The ld. D/R was heard at length. Case records carefully perused.